"legitimate_rape"

[groggy]

The sad thing is not this one quote from one politician, but that its more symptomatic of the kinds of taliban like changes going on in the US, where a ridiculous number of people still don't believe in evolution. Its getting worse down there, not more educated.

 

[rld]

Silly indeed. I've seen dudes doing life in prison just for sleeping with a 17.5 year old girl.

I personally think they should change the legal definitions around so that it's clear as to WHAT the wrongdoing was and WHY the person was being sentenced. For instance, if you go ask a random stranger why pedophilia is bad, I'm 100% sure that either they'd say that it's a deviant activity, or that they're harming the children. If it's "deviant", then 100 years back I'm sure people considered homosexuality as deviant, as well as sex before marriage and even using condoms. So in the end, it's a "history repeating itself" kind of issue. On the other hand, if pedophilia results in harming the children, then wouldn't that be considered as rape? For instance, getting a 10 year old to have sex with you who have no idea what sex is, or having forced intercourse with a 16 year old - those two are situations of rape, no? So really, it's not pedophilia that is wrong, but rather, it's rape that's wrong. If a 17 year old have sex with a 19 year old and they both consent to it, then who the fuck are they exactly harming?

A teacher going around groping 15 year old students is going to be charged with pedophilia, but what if he/she groped 18 year old students instead? Would that be adult-ophilia? My point is, for either case, the teacher has performed sexual assault. It should be person's intent that matters, rather than the age group of the victims. Which is why arresting someone just for sleeping with a person in a different age group without taking into consideration of anything else is... rather silly.


Laws, for the most part, is kind of messed up. A lot of innocent people are put in prison, whereas a lot of truly sick fucks are allowed to run around free. I've been a jury in several animal cruelty/abuse cases, and let me tell you - it doesn't matter what the intent of the crime was, and it doesn't matter if the person was a sadistic monster or something like that. All animal abusers will get no more than 2 years in prison because let's face it - animals can't speak up.

But I digress. Back on topic with the discussion of this "genius" doctor thinking that he knows so much about rape.

The fact that you have been on a jury for several animal cruelty cases is really, really bizarre.

 

[rld]

I think what he was TRYING to say was, the more violent the rape, the more likely the female body will NOT ACCEPT the seed.

What he is trying to say, is that some women might lie about getting raped to fit within the rape exception to get an abortion.

But no matter which way you spin it, this comment is offensive and stupid.

 

[fuji]

A teacher going around groping 15 year old students is going to be charged with pedophilia, but what if he/she groped 18 year old students instead?

The law recognizes that adults can manipulate children, groom them over time so that they "consent" to destructive behavior, like sex with the adult. This is particularly true of adults who are in a position of power and authority over children. So when you have a 17 year old sleeping with his or her teacher, and claiming it's consensual--you have to ask yourself, to what extent did the teacher groom the child over time to have that response? The grooming activity in and of itself is harmful to the child, just harder to detect than the eventual sexual assault it leads to. The fact that the child is now claiming it's consensual is actually part of the harm done.

So in a very limited, academic way you are right--it's the sexual assault that is the problem. But really, when we are dealing with children, it's just a lot more complicated than that, because of how easy it is to manipulate a child into believing whatever it is you want them to believe. If you relied on whether the child described it as "consensual" then many pedophiles would get away with sexual assault by successfully grooming the child to appear to be going along with it.

Obviously the age of consent is pretty arbitrary. Nothing magic happens on someone's birthday. It is probably too young for some kids, and too old for others. But we had to draw the line somewhere, and while we can debate raising it or lowering it by a couple of years, the underlying principle is sound. It's the same as the arbitrary alcohol percent we picked for drunk driving--some people may be fine at that level, but we had to pick some level, and since everyone knows what the rules are...

...and I agree with RLD, it is bizarre to the point of being unbelievable that you served on the jury for several different animal cruelty cases. Most people don't even wind up serving on one jury in their lifetime, let alone several cases, let alone several cases all covering the same type of crime.